While he was campaigning for re-election, he sought endorsement from Mark Sokolich, the (Democrat) mayor of Fort Lee, which, though located in New Jersey across the Hudson River from Manhattan, is, in effect, a part of metropolitan New York.

Fort Lee is connected to Manhattan via the George Washington Bridge, which usually runs three lanes in either direction.

It is said more traffic crosses this bridge each day than any other bridge in the world.

Christie's deputy chief of staff, Bridget Kelly, sent a memo to one of Christie's appointees on the Port Authority. ''Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee'', she emailed.

A few weeks later, two of the three lanes coming from Fort Lee were closed, for what was said to be a traffic study. It causes major traffic congestion and virtual gridlock in the area, and major problems for schools, commuters, police and emergency services.

The traffic study lasted five days, and generated considerable heat. In this sense what appeared to be an act of spite had some of its own correctives, if only because people outside Christie's control wanted to know what had gone wrong and why. Christie's two nominees on the Port Authority - not only involved in the actual orders to close the lanes over the fake traffic study, but involved in intimidation and cover-up afterwards - were forced to resign. So too, after initial denials of any complicity, was Ms Kelly, once her email emerged.

The governor, naturally, had no knowledge whatever of her malfeasance, and was ''shocked and disappointed'' with what one of his close inner circle had done. In that style of confession and contrition for which Tony Abbott is somewhat famous, he took responsibility for the act of Ms Kelly, while denying knowledge or culpability.

Indeed Ms Kelly had misled him with her own denials, he insisted. Indeed he has posited himself as the real victim of the affair - at least since the complicity of his office was established - since it has done some damage to his credibility, squeaky-clean reputation and, perhaps, his higher ambitions.

His humiliation has given as much satisfaction to the Republican right, particularly the Tea Partygoers, as it has generally to Democrats. A good proportion of that right would prefer to commit electoral suicide again, rather than to surrender control of the party to someone they regard as likely to sell out sacred principles of the right in efforts to garner at least 51 per cent of the vote.

Actually, Christie is pretty conservative on both government and moral issues by Australian standards, but is regarded as a centrist, a moderate, even perhaps a ''liberal'' in the US. His campaign slogan, which might have been pitched at the Tea Party, said ''Stop blaming, start building.''

Seasoned Australians might remark that the affair has some superficial parallels with alleged attempts by a media staffer of Julia Gillard to encourage Aboriginal protesters to confront Abbott outside the Aboriginal tent embassy on Australia Day two years ago. That was, apparently, an unauthorised adventure which caused disappointment to the prime minister, and led to the sacking of the errant staffer.

Mercifully, far fewer people were held up or delayed in traffic for hours by the would-be bastardry, revenge or abuse of power.

It's a political tale to which any citizen of the world, an Australian as much as anyone else, can relate, and whether or not the New Jersey or American public ''moves on'' from it, it is, somewhat like the Bill Clinton cigar, likely to be associated with him for the rest of his political life. It was a dirty trick - reprehensible if hardly of Nixonian levels. Whether by him or on his behalf probably does not matter greatly. I should be very surprised if it was politically fatal for him - because the modern ''narrative'' of becoming president now often involves many ''learnings'' from missteps, mistakes, misbehaviour and, sometimes, even misdemeanours. Indeed, it may be that one is not ''blooded'' into being of proven presidential calibre until one has shown some capacity in personal crisis management, in explaining away damning evidence, and, perhaps, faced a good deal of betrayal from one's closest and dearest (or done the betraying oneself, and been caught).

It is, of course, only ever by coincidence that these character-forming moments occur after one has been found out. Be that as it may, there is a liturgy to the ritual of manning up, taking responsibility without blame, calling for forgiveness, and asking us to put such unfortunate events behind us.

Much to be deplored, of course, is the way that some journalists and some critics insist not only of ''wallowing'' over the unfortunate events, but who refuse to accept the straightforward explanation and persist in digging all about.

Alas, this is just what is happening to Christie now that some sheen has been taken from the Mr Clean image. Thus there are no investigations on foot into political decisions he has made - the innuendo being not so much corruption as partial treatment for political friends and allies. He is being ''probed'' for misuse of recovery money after Hurricane Sandy. He appeared in TV ads giving pep talks, updates and advice to citizens of his state; it is now suggested that this was disguised political advertising. Thank God, again, that could never happen here.

Politicians, necessarily, have few friends or people in their inner sanctum. This aide, apparently, would have been (apart from the mishap of getting caught) have been a strategist, tactician and sounding board for a man with a significant chance of being president. What act of childish spite might she have committed then?

The cynic probably assumes that Christie was more knowing and involved than he now claims. But even if otherwise, one can ask about his judgment about staff selection and to think it goes to his character. One can judge politicians from the character and records of those with whom they work most closely - a reason why some Labor politicians with dubious acquaintances are unlikely ever to get public forgiveness, let alone forgetfulness.

Jack Waterford is Editor-at-Large.