well, you get the idea. >> of course, ivan boesky, was guilty. bargaining power. >> levine was a fish and boesky was the shark, who's the whale they're going to catch? >> i don't know. >> that's possible >> in the middle of all this is drexel lambert. high interests but also high risk. drexel made a deal with ivan boesky made millions of dollars illegally. >> the government charges. boesky bought the stocks and made millions and shared the profit. milken betrayed his client and earned $6.5 million more at the client's expense. >> further exposure weaken the market themselves. >> this came from inside. i guess the market is over, huh? >> they're calling it the monday ma massac massacre. >> i thought the nearest thing to a melt down. >> the dow jones industrial average was down more than 500 points. >> the crash people had not seen since the great depression. no one had seen the stock market falls back that fast. >> paper losses of more than $500 million. >> wall street's black monday. >> that crash was one of the first signs of how dangerous this

this after it was learned that ivan boesky was talking. >> this was like arresting the madam of a brothel and finding her private book of clients. >> this guy boesky takes a fall, and all over wall street they're practically jumping out windows. it comes out he's been taping his phone calls and maybe his private talks for three months. and wall street big shots begin wetting their -- well, you get the idea. >> of course ivan boesky would be found guilty. all he had was bargaining power. who could he deliver? >> well, let me ask you this. levine was a fish, boesky was a shark. whofls the -- who was the whale they're going to catch? >> i don't know. >> rexall burnham? >> that's possible. >> in the middle of all this is rexall, burnham, lambert, a little known wall street firm. they specialized in so-called junk bonds. high interest but also high risk. >> milken made a secret deal with swindler ivan boesky to make millions of dollars illegally. >> they came to milken's firm and told him they were planning a takeover. he then whispered that se

>> we call it success, some people that turned out to have engaged in criminal activity like ivan boeskyoes at the peak of their careers. >> millions of investors are appalled at the boesky affair. >> get every one of them, put them in jail. >> there have been more than 48 cases of insider rading, brought by the new york u.s. attorney rudolph guilliani. >> he had the aura of being the best man in law enforcement. >> maybe we can't catch all of them, we can sure as heck deliver a message if you do get caught, you're going to lose your liberty, go to prison. >> today the prospect of a widespread scandal more certain, finding out ivan boesky is talking. >> it is like finding a private book of clients. >> he takes a fall, all over wall street they're practically jumping out windows. he has been taping phone calls and private talks for three months. wall street big shots are wetting their -- you get the idea. >> of course he was guilty. there would be no defense. all he had was bargaining power. >> let me ask you this. levine was a fish, boesky was the shark, who's the whale they're going to

this after it was learned that ivan boesky was talking, and then some. >> this is like arresting therivate book of clients. >> this guy takes a fall and all over wall street they're practically jumping out windows. it comes out he's been taping his phone calls and maybe private talks for three months. and wall street big shots began wetting their -- well, you get the idea. >> of course, he was guilty. there was going to be more defense. all he had was bargaining power. >> levine was a fish, boesky was a shark. who is the whale they're going to catch? >> i don't know. >> in the middle of all this is drexel. >> the commission says drexel and the head of his junk bond department made a secret deal with ivan boesky to make millions illegally. >> california company wics was planning a takeover. he bought the stock, made profit but milen betrayed his client and earned $6.5 million more at the client's expense. >> authorities are worried that further disclosures resulting from the affair may weaken public confidence in financial markets and weaken the markets themselves. >> it's a mad house

ellen: it has changed a lot since ivan boesky was the star of the insider trading follies decades ago at is why it is so hard to prosecute insider trading. that is because insider trading's definition, to the extent it even has one, has really changed. carol: we spoke to a reporter about the story. >> there have been a series of cases that have come out of the raj rajaratnam series of prosecutions in new york where a number of traders have appealed to higher and higher courts and ultimately, a couple of traders who were charged in 2012 had their convictions overturned. and the appeals court kind of redefined what insider trading is and what the government has to prove in order to kind of, successfully prosecute someone. david: it has to do with it who is giving you the info, right? >> it has to do with how much you know about the original source of information, whether they got a benefit in return for leaking out this information, and then there is some more debate about what that benefit had to have been. and part of the reason this definition even exists is because they don't want p

. >> it has changed a lot since ivan boesky was the start of insider trading decades ago.nd what we look at is why it is so hard to prosecute insider trading. that is because insider trading, 's definition has really changed. >> there have been a series of chases that have come out of the series of prosecutions in new york where a number of traders had appealed to higher and higher courts. ultimately, a couple traders charged 2012 had their convictions overturned this redefined what insider trading is and what the government has to prove in order to successfully prosecute. >> it has to do with who is right?you the info, >> it has to do with how much you know about the initial source of information, whether you got a benefit from this information, and then there is more debate about what that benefit had to have been. part of the reason this definition even exists is because they don't want people who are say, whistleblowers trying to report fraud to the outside world who are not doing it for any personal gain. they don't want to silence those people. there are times when y