The main trade routes connecting Mesoamerica to the rest of North America traveled through western Mexico into the American Southwest, and from there into other parts of the continent. This map reconstructs Pre-Columbian trade routes in the western part of what is now the US. After entering the Southwest, the furthest east a definitively Mesoamerican artifact (a piece of Mexican obsidian) has been found is eastern Oklahoma (a little north of where the Kadohadacho villages' star is located, at a Caddoan Mississippian site. So there's no evidence for Aztec-Iroquois trade.

In David Cusick's 1828 Sketches of Ancient History of the Six Nations, the Tuscarora author mentions an encounter that some have suggested to be evidence of Iroquoian-Mesoamerican contact, but I doubt it. Assuming Cusick based that portion of his Sketches on actual Iroquoian traditions (other parts of the Sketches are echoed by more traditional sources, but Cusick's version is usually altered to be more appealing to Euro-American audiences), it seems more likely that the events he's referring to are conflict between Iroquoian peoples and the Hopewell or the Mississippians (Cahokia, perhaps?), depending on the actual time-frame. Anyhow, Cusick said that 2,200 years before Columbus (whenever he seems to estimate dates, they always appear to be wildly exaggerated), the Iroquoians sent a delegation to establish peaceful relations to the Emperor of the Golden City to the southwest. The Emperor, finding out that there was this rival power in the northeast, began shoring up his borders and established forts almost to Lake Erie. This in turn triggered a hundred years of fighting between between the two nations. Ultimately, the Iroquoians proved victorious, thanks to their mastery of the bow and arrow, which the people of the Golden City either lacked or were not as skilled with. The outposts were destroyed and the Golden City's empire pushed back.

"Emperor" and "Golden City" are the phrases Cusick used that calls to mind distant Mexico, but its more likely that those words chosen to appeal to Euro-American conceptions of political power and wealth. He also refers to Iroquoian leaders as "Kings" for example, which poorly represents their political power but does reflect Euro-American understandings. Cusick's "Emperor", assuming he's based on a historical figure at all, was more likely a paramount chief or some similarly far-reaching influence. Barbara Mann, a modern Seneca historian, has suggested that Cusick's "Golden City" (again, if based on anything real) might be more accurately described as a Shining or Shimmering City rather than a Golden one. The reflective quality of materials like copper and mica, which were commonly used in the region (while gold, as far as we know, was not until very recently), was what made them valuable to people. The Hopewell and the Mississippians certainly had a fondness for such materials and amassed sizable quantities. The idea that Iroquoians with bows fought enemies to the southwest who didn't have them or weren't as skilled with them fits well with the archaeology of the Ohio valley, which indicates that the bow was introduced to the region from the New York area around 400-500 AD, just as the Hopewell period ended. However, while the Hopewell built huge ceremonial structures, they don't appear to have lived in cities or even villages. Cahokia or some other Mississippian polity fits better with the "Emperor" and "Golden City" idea, and the Dhegihan nations (whose ancestors seem to have been founders of Cahokia and other Middle Mississippian sites) agree they had a long conflict with Iroquoians who drove them out of the Ohio Valley. But there's no evidence of Mississippian-proper villages or outposts anywhere close to Lake Erie (unless we've severely misunderstood the Mississippian influences on the Fort Ancient Culture). Of course, Cusick has been known to jumble up different parts of traditional history into singular episodes, so perhaps he borrowed from several different incidents to create his version of Iroquoian history.

Which is all, apparently, a long way of saying "No." Cusick's history is probably the best chance of making Mesoamerican-Northeast connection, but as I said, there are more likely explanations--if it needs a historical explanation at all. In the Southeast, there are some better hints in traditional histories, but no archaeological evidence beyond the obsidian artifact I already mentioned.