Hillary Clinton has now made her position on the Iran nuclear deal perfectly clear: She embraces it; she deserves credit for putting it into motion — but she’s skeptical of Iran’s intentions.

Typical Clinton: All things for all people — with a position set by pure political calculation.

Democrats support the deal, so she can’t oppose it without inviting Joe Biden to waltz in and steal the nomination.

But everyone else is opposed — support’s down to 21 percent in the latest Pew poll — so she’s talking tough.

This is the same Hillary who voted for the Iraq war when it served her ambitions, then turned against it when things got tough.

And who during the 2008 campaign called Barack Obama “reckless and naive” for thinking he could negotiate directly with Iran — before she proceeded to do just that as Obama’s secretary of state.

More, she made the call on the key concession in the negotiations: agreeing that Iran could keep enriching uranium without “irreversibly” shutting down its weapons program.

Now she vows that, as president, she’ll “distrust and verify” to make sure Iran lives up to its bargain.

She’ll “distrust” — the candidate whose ­email excuses change by the week. Americans distrust her as much as they do Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Does anyone believe her threat of military action if Iran still moves to go nuclear? She can’t afford to alienate the Democratic base. She’s just leaving herself enough outs to distance herself from the deal when it fails.

She vows to bolster Israel’s security — even as she insists the Iran deal will make Israel safer. This from someone who admits she was Obama’s “designated yeller” at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Just what Hillary Clinton truly believes in — besides her own ambition — has always been a mystery. Her positions all change to whatever serves her immediate interests.

Question is, when the phone rings at ­­3 a.m., which Hillary Clinton would pick up?