To what degree did Hitler use illegitimate tactics vs legitimate tactics in his rise to power in 1933

The intention of the investigation is purely to obtain information from pieces of the past albeit the same may be utilized in the furtherance of academic studies of the lives and obsessions of world leaders and other significant figures.
There are accounts that Hitler did not have fixed and definite plans during the course of his adventurism for influence and control. Instead, he was simply practical and acted pursuant to what he believed was applicable and effective at the moment. (A Pragmatic Approach? BIDEFORD COLLEGE HISTORY DEPT’. Bideford College Online. [internet]). This attitude of Hitler was apparent both in his policies dealing with foreign as well as domestic matters. Hence, as far as regarding the involvement of Germany outside of the nation, Hitler moved his way responsively to whatever then was taking place around the world, particularly the neighbors of Germany in Europe and in other parts of the West. It might therefore be that the dictator did not give too much attention to whether or not the processes of his operations were legitimate. This technique of Hitler was seen when Benito Mussolini started his own expansion by invading Abyssiania in 1935. Assessing the intrusion as having diverted global awareness of the occurrences in Germany, Hitler took similar actions in Rhineland in March 1936 by establishing authority and supremacy in the area. He did not care if his moves were construed as inappropriate and he acted decisively and to the fullest while the opportunity was still at hand. During the incursion, the German leader must be under the belief and perception that it would bring results efficiently and effectively while the allied forces were out of sight. It is very significant to observe that the military campaign clearly violated the Treaty of Versailles which mandated Rhineland to be a neutral ground. (Timeline for WW2: 1933-1941, Beginning of Nazi Germany to Invasion of Soviet Union.