You don't debunk something by saying it's debunked. So her claim is that because she was no longer in the trust and safety team at the time of the video, her opinions are irrelevant?

Of course she's going to claim that the video was "heavily edited." But the validity of the video comes from the fact that there is no context which makes the clips of her speaking any less damning. They clearly indicate a willingness by Google to curate search results.

>The video then goes on to stitch together a series of debunked conspiracy theories about our search results, and our other products.

I'd love to see this debunking.

>Google has repeatedly been clear that it works to be a trustworthy source of information, without regard to political viewpoint. In fact, Google has no notion of political ideology in its rankings. And everything I have seen backs this up. Our CEO has said ”We do not bias our products to favor any political agenda.” He’s somewhat more powerful and authoritative than me.

Oh, well, if the CEO says it, it must be true. This is just a weak attempt at damage control.

Her claim is much simpler. Project Veritas calls her a "powerful senior executive," and she says "I'm not any sort of executive and wouldn't know about any of this even if it were true."

I don't see any reason why a propaganda outfit led by a guy convicted of sneaking into government offices on false pretenses should be taken at their word that a random Google employee is a powerful executive when the employee in question says that they are not one. Seems like "they are an executive" would be pretty easy to establish.