You said: Get the facts straight before launching into your strawman rant. She was charged with "willfully intimidating, coercing, threatening and harassing a foreign official." (Source) Note that that has nothing to do with press passes, or public events, or anything else. Under the interpretation of the law that they're using against her, the same charge could be applied to anyone who says such a thing to a foreign leader outside an official event as well as during one.
***
Whoa, easy on the attack, big guy! I don't rant, I discuss. First, be clear that I support what this lady said to Hu. My problem is with the time, place and manner of the statements offered. She was not credentialed to speak at the event, and should not have done so. My concern with what she did is not content-related, contrary to the apparent position taken by most others on this thread. If we are to allow her to do this, then we must be prepared to let those with positions we disagree with shout down other speakers at official events. I support civil disobedience, but those who engage in it have to be prepared to pay the consequences of doing so. I agree that she should be punished only lightly, but one cannot simply ignore her actions and hope to be able to complain the next time he anti-war idiots disrupte say, Bush and Blair in the rose garden, or the president during his state of the union, etc. My points were not strawmen, as you state, they were examples of what we must be prepared to allow if this outburst is treated as authorized by the First Amendment.
I don't have a serious problem with them removing her from the event. Prosecuting her for what they're prosecuting her for, however, is way out of line. When you look at the actual charges brought against her, it very much is content-related.