The alarm bells sound regularly: cybergeddon; the next Pearl Harbor; one of the greatest existential threats facing the United States. With increasing frequency, these are the grave terms officials invoke about the menace of cybercrime - and they're not understating the threat.

The alarm bells sound regularly: cybergeddon; the next Pearl Harbor; one of the greatest existential threats facing the United States. With increasing frequency, these are the grave terms officials invoke about the menace of cybercrime - and they're not understating the threat.

I would like to think that the level of aggressiveness in law enforcement will remain the same, when you're talking about things like keeping the markets fair and government honest. I don't foresee any departure from that, unless I'm missing something big.

As the United States attorney in Manhattan, I have come to worry about few things as much as the gathering cyber threat.

That's an incredibly serious thing if people think that the president of the United States can tell heads of law enforcement agencies, based on his own whim or his own personal preferences or friendships, that they should or should not pursue particular criminal cases against individuals. That's not how America works.

In some respects, inside information is a form of financial steroid. It is unfair: it is offensive; it is unlawful; and it puts a black mark on the entire enterprise.

I eat almost no lunch. I have a big dinner but I don't have a big lunch.