“An Obama spokesperson vehemently denied the former president’s involvement”
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1802
So he’s throwing Lynch under the bus? He’s saying she acted without authorization, as required by the above statute?
(a)
(1) Notwithstanding any other law, the President, through the Attorney General, may authorize electronic surveillance without a court order ...
(b) Applications for a court order under this subchapter are authorized if the President has, by written authorization, empowered the Attorney General to approve applications to the court having jurisdiction ...
And why would they do this, if they were in fact not actually trying to ensure national security by surreptitiously monitoring the communications of foreign countries and their agents?
Who would benefit by knowing what candidate Trump was saying, believing his conversations to be confidential?