She was caught with raw satellite images on her server, the kinds of things that live in SCIFs:

So? Again, you have to prove up the actual elements of the crime. One of the elements is that the person has to remove the classified material. Not be in possession of it. They have to be the one to remove it.

Again, if you have anything that shows that Clinton removed that photo from the SCIF, I'd like to see it. The most likely scenario is that someone sent it to her, not that she sent it to herself. But if there's any evidence that shows that she was the one who sent that particular file to herself, let's see it.

Isn't destroying evidence a crime?

Usually not. There are specific, limited circumstances where it would be. Here in Florida, for example, we have a statute that prohibits tampering with physical evidence - and even then, only when they know there's a pending criminal trial, proceeding, or investigation by a law enforcement agency and the destruction is with the intent to impair its availability in such proceeding. Destroying things for other purposes, even if it later turns out to have been evidence, isn't a crime. The federal provision doesn't apply to Congressional inquiries, so it's not applicable:

law.cornell.edu: 18 U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy | U.S. Code | US Law

Her lawyers that were examining the server...did they have security clearances? Bet they didn't.

They did. Most had held senior positions at State, and would have had high-level security clearances as part of that service. The others, David Kendall and Katherine Turner, separately obtained security clearances so that they could work on representing Clinton in this matter.