Did he mean Hitler in a good way or a bad way?

From a (primarily but not exclusively US) RW perspective Hitler was bad, because:
1) he lost
2) he was secular (despite initial attempts to pretend otherwise)
2a) he kept Kristian(TM) nutjobs out of positions of power (Himmler was a pagan nutjob)
3) he despised the old RW elites and only used them (up)
3) his populism was not 100% fake, his regime had far too much social mobility and invested heavily in infrastructure that also benefited commoners and even the poor
4) he was an upstart himself (petit bourgeois on the downward path)
5) he valued competence (well, at least in the military) over social standing and money
6) he was personally interested in the arts and not just as a means to make money or to show off with expensive objects.
7) being a vegan (although in moderation) by itself disqualifies him

The sad thing is that it was a not-insane question to ask.

actual reporter asks Kushner: have you accomplished anything, anywhere?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkF04dedOQw

I am aware that this has been a constantly pushed meme for many years now.
But I see it the as more the other way around: Hitler has to be painted as a leftist because it has been impossible to ‘unstain’ him (despite strong efforts). Those who push the “The Nazis were left (and gay)” meme usually know exactly that it is BS. IMO the items on my list are the actual things stopping them from idolizing him while they actually could be used to improve Hitler’s public image. It’s the things that actual neonazis over here push into the foreground (“OK, he overdid the Jew thing a bit but look at what he achieved and how much better it would have been for us, if the decadent West had not joined forces with the Reds.”). Btw that was what Hitler himself thought.
That’s why I think the US Far Right resembles the Austrofascists much more than the Italian fascists (also too much investment in the public good despite being much better on the neofeudalism front) or Nazis.
They would love Hitler for all the evil he did, if those points on the list would not spoil it all. Not just a conjecture on my part, some pastors on the Far Right are quite open about it and even attribute Hitlers failure to his lack of religion (with a minority blaming him for being a Catholic).
Btw I still think that claims that His Orangeness read Hitler’s writings and speeches (and had both on his nightstand) are completely bogus. Even most Nazis don’t manage to get through “Mein Kampf” and prefer a ‘best of’ of the speeches on audio (which at least have actual entertainment value even for non-nazis as opposed to most speeches by other politicians). He was provided with some key words and phrases by those more knowledgeable and patient than himself and probably doesn’t know in most cases where the stuff came from.
RW speechwriters quote-mine Hitler&Goebbels speeches on a regular base but would prefer no one to notice. That’s one thing that still manages to shock me. I hear stuff from the mouth of US RWingers and instantly get a replay in my head of the German original.

BTW, Genghis Khan was notably to the left of modern MAGA/GOPers.

Religiously tolerant and allergic to religiously motivated violence.
Extremly opposed to and unforgiving of backstabbing, even if it was in his favor.
Established a firm meritocracy where competence was the only way to rise up. This was not limited to native Mongols.
Very open to new ideas from the cultures he conquered, provided they improved on the status quo.
Took extreme care in selecting highly intelligent, independent and competent daughters-in-law who managed to keep the empire together after his death (and even more so after his successor’s). Sons-in-law on the other hand were cannon-fodder.
Great lawgiver who made no major exceptions for himself.

OK, he had occasional genocidal tendencies but that is neither left or right by nature.