This is just wild speculation and part of a frustrating pattern where all sorts of questionable behaviors by authorities are justified by other unrelated properties of the victims.
She is obviously doing good research, but I could also see why she wouldn't be a good fit for Google (or really any other large tech company).
I really don't see why this isn't a win for everyone. She said she didn't want to work there under current conditions, now she's not. I'm sure she'll get a job in academia or at a think tank where she'll be able to be much more critical of Google and big tech. The world will better off because her voice and research won't be toned down by a Google internal review. And Google gets to get rid of a problematic employee. It's a win-win-win.
The most interesting part of the story is the part that happened before this.
Is it unrelated though? Her behaviour in terms of communication, less what she says but more how she says it, is extremely related to this case.
However I do think I agree that it's speculation, at best.