The differences between Jones and Rivero have emerged largely because of these three factors:
a) Jones' business plan, which has woken up more people about the NWO because he does not concentrate on one faction (Zionists, Jesuits, Masons) and thereby alienate people who might be otherwise open to the truth about conspiracy, coverups and so on. Jones limits his critique of Israel to separate alternative media from accusations of Jew-bashing. So when the Israeli government really, really needs to be hammered over its ongoing human rights abuses, ridiculously strong grip over the Western media and politicians, etc, Rivero is the guy to do it, because he does not try to tie it in with a larger NWO scheme, or image control. While this makes up for some topics Jones won't dwell on, it doesn't make for the most balanced approach by either talk show. It is possible to support Israel as a COUNTRY without backing its policies, just as one can love America without conflating it with the policies of an Obama or Bush.
b) Rivero's strongly felt atheism, which colors his attitude about Israel, Satanic ritual abuse, any balanced view of the Christian and biblical influences on the country's founding, and selectively libertarian views on social issues. E.g., he opposes social conservatives who try to impose their views with the quip, "if you don't support gay marriage, then don't marry a gay," but says nothing about the social left using government force to make everybody to accept and approve such unions. He won't take Satanist abuses seriously, because it might require him to believe in a real Satan motivating the evils done in his name. This kind of dogged unbelief leads to inconsistencies such as Rivero correctly pointing out that the modern Jews in Israel are descendants of Askenazis (instead of semitic peoples), then turning around and blaming their land-grabbing and occupation policies on following the tendencies of "nomadic tribes" (aka, ancient Semites) they are NOT descended from.
c) In the end, Jones has a comprehensive alternative view of the elite that presumes more deliberate and coordinated planning by the establishment, than Rivero does. Rivero often implies the actions or tactics of the establishment or the banks are merely selfish, haphazard, or reflect old-fashioned techniques in the age of the internet, while Jones suggests their planning has already incorporated people waking up to their schemes. Rivero thinks the imminent financial collapse is happening because of "the failed experiment" of private bank currency systems (or greedy "money junkies"), while Jones speaks of it being a deliberate economic implosion intended to destroy the middle class and throw the world into global feudalism, or prison planet that will then be unable to resist the elite's eugenics program. Rivero doesn't subscribe to this entire scheme, which explains why he frequently calls many coverups the result of mere incompetence or greed.
Great post PeaceAndFreedom having listend to alot of AJ and MR myself I think you have summed up the 2 radio shows and presenters very well indeed.