After reading a bit more since the articles came out, I am somewhat less concerned than I was earlier when I first read this (and similar in more established media).
Republican committee chairs officially ask for PERJURY probe of Hillary Clinton over congressional testimony that 'nothing marked classified' was on her server - which FBI director disputed
The truth of the matter is that Hillary said that there wasn't anything classified on her server, while the FBI director said that there were a couple of items with classified markings.
What I think now is that there still is very little chance a perjury charge could stick if prosecuted -- because they'd have to prove that Hillary KNEW that the email messages with the classified markings was on (or had been on) her server when she said that there had never been.
This very recently published article says as much:
Why Hillary Clinton Will Not be Charged for Lying to Congress — Even Though She Did
"While a conviction under section 1001 is generally considered to be easier to obtain than a conviction under section 1621, it still requires a showing that the witness had intent to deceive or mislead Congress. The intent element can be satisfied by demonstrating the witness had a reckless disregard of the truth under section 1001."
Now, the article does describe a couple of her other statements that could be a bit more problematic, but they conclude that there isn't enough there to prosecute.'
Let's just state this to wrap up: it was stupid of her to have her own private server, and she shouldn't have done it. I think she's probably figured that out by now.'