Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
.a personal belief in the witness’ credibility. A jury could Reasonably believe the prosecutor’s indications if ... the prosecutor implicitly vouches for the witness’ veracity by indicating that information not presented to the jury supports the testimony. United States v. Eyster, 948 F.2d 1196, 1206 (11th Cir.1991) (citations omitted); see also United States v. Martinez, 96 F.3d 473, 476 (11th Cir.1996) (“[AJrgument to the jury "must be básed solely on the evidence admitted at trial”). The prosecutor^ statement that Darlene Steele’s testimony would have “corroborated” Bill Steele’s was an improper attempt to bolster Bill Steele’s credibility plain error question where cumulative effect of errors compelled reversal); cf. United States v. McLain, 823 F.2d 1457, 1462 (11th Cir.1987) . The elements of this case — the introduction
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that although prosecutorial misconduct alone would not have merited reversal the cumulative effect of the errors committed by the judge and the prosecutor  denied the defendants a fair trial
B. holding that the failure to identify and distinguish which claims of prosecutorial misconduct have been previously litigated and which were waived permits rejection of the underlying claims of prosecutorial misconduct which in turn eviscerates the cognizable layered claims
C. holding that alleged prosecutorial misconduct must be evaluated in light of the prosecutors argument and the entire record and if a review of the record convinces the court that the jury would have convicted defendant even if it were not exposed to the alleged improper prosecutorial comments then no actual prejudice occurred
D. holding prosecutorial misconduct claim barred by procedural default
E. recognizing that the court sanctions more harshly for cumulative misconduct than for isolated misconduct
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.