Both the Jerusalem Post and Politico wrote stories about Obama asking lawmakers to alleviate sanctions on Iran. While both were relatively fair and balanced about the political facts, JPost cited protests of Iranian Jews in Tehran because the newspaper's audience is mostly American Jews, even though the protests were more or less irrelevant to the story. Additionally, JPost's story was much longer, perhaps the issue is highly sensitive to the country. It used more key words about Israel and nuclear weapons to frame the context of the story than Politico did.
In terms of experts, the quotes were all from American officials in both articles. However, because the "nugget of news" in this story is primarily America's actions and decisions on sanctions for Iran, opinions of Iranians may be irrelevant to the story itself.
The stories cater to different audiences. Jews or people concerned about Israel's future and welfare may choose to read the story on JPost and gain more background, and average Americans may choose to read the story on Politico to get a brief background. Neither is more trustworthy; it just depends on the type of news the reader wants.