Jacques Chirac's Route after his Nuclear Remark about a Nuclear Iran

Jacques Chirac's Route after his Nuclear Remark about a Nuclear Iran
Identify and explain the fallacies of relevance in the following passages:
PROBLEMS
1. If you can't blame the English language and your own is unforgivingly precise, blame the microphone. That was Jacques Chirac's route after his nuclear remark about a nuclear Iran. "Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous," Mr Chirac said with a shrug. The press was summoned back for a retake. "I should rather have paid attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record," Mr Chirac offered as if the record rather than the remark were the issue.
—Stacy Schiff, “Slip Sliding Away,” The New York Times, February 2, 2007
Jacques commits the fallacy of relevance in the passage. He claimed that Iran's one or second bomb did not pose a threat. Later, he stated that if he knew he was being recorded, he could not have made such remarks and would be more attentive to what he was saying. Thus, from the passage, he commits a red herring fallacy even though he tried to distract the crowd.
2. Nietzsche was personally more philosophical than his philosophy. His talk about power, harshness and great immorality was the hobby of a harmless young scholar and constitutional invalid.
—George Santayana, Egotism in German Philosophy, 1915
The passage presents a hominem fallacy. The author argues with the philosopher rather than their ideologies. For instance, he makes remarks about the philosopher's attitude, i.e. harshness of the young scholar rather than the idea presented. But, to make his argument relevant and why he thinks Nietzsche is more philosophical than his philosophy, he would have presented facts to justify the claim.
3. Like an armed warrior, like a plumed knight, James G. Blaine marched down the halls of the American Congress. He threw his shining lances full and fair against the brazen foreheads of every defamer of his country and maligner of its honor.
       For the Republican party to desert this gallant man now is worse than if an army should desert their general upon the battlefield.
—Robert G. Ingersoll, nominating speech at the 
Republican National Convention, 1876
A weak analogy fallacy is committed in the passage. This can be seen in the statement, 'Leaving the general on the battlefield is severe compared to leaving an individual by the political party. The betrayal in the passage is comparable to Blane's case, which presents a false analogy.
4. However, it matters very little now what the king of England either says or does; he hath wickedly broken through every moral and human obligation, trampled nature and conscience beneath his feet, and by a steady and constitutional spirit of insolence and cruelty procured for himself a universal hatred.
—Thomas Paine, Common Sense, 1776
Pain commits a genetic fallacy when he argues that what the king of England does or say matters very little as he is wicked. Pain concludes that the Prince of England is wicked from his origin rather than the merit of his character.
5. This embarrassing volume is an out-and-out partisan screed made up of illogical...