Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
made from prison to Attorney Alva’s office, in which he inquired about representation for one of his co-defendants, was in error as violative of the attorney-client privilege. We need not delve into Appellant’s substantive discussion of this issue, however, because as the Commonwealth correctly notes, the issue is waived. At trial, Appellant objected to the admission of the telephone call, but only upon relevance grounds. Appellant then lodged a second objection concerning the publication of the transcript of the call to the jury. At no time did Appellant argue that the contents of the telephone call were protected by the attorney-client privilege. Accordingly, his argument to that end is waived. Pa. R.A.P. 302(a); see also Commonwealth v. Gilmore, 464 Pa. 464, 347 A.2d 305, 307 (1975) . G. Testimony of Tezzie Smith In his final
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the specific argument regarding an issue must be made in the trial court to preserve that issue for appellate review
B. holding that the appellant developed his argument sufficiently to raise the issue for appellate review
C. holding that preservation of the specific argument in support of the ground for reversal is required for appellate review
D. holding that to preserve an issue for appellate review the specific legal argument or ground upon which it is based must be presented to the trial court
E. holding that preservation of error in the trial court is not necessary as to lack of standing
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.