I haven't seen any sources definitively define her as being a lobbyist currently.  Nevertheless, the entire section "Lobbyist at the White House" implies that she was there representing corporate or client interests, and there is no evidence to support that.  In stories about those visits, she isn't identified as a lobbyist or conducting business on behalf of paying clients.  Wouldn't a reporter want to define her as a lobbyist when covering her visits?  In fact one visit described on this page is wholly inaccurate, as it says she was present for a meeting that the source says she wasn't present for.  If that's your basis for lobbying, it doesn't seem to hold up.