We can write down a table and look for a pattern:
n T(n)
- ----
2 a
4 T(2) + a = 2a
16 T(4) + a = 3a
256 T(16) + a = 4a
...
2^(2^k) (k+1)a
We noticed 2 = 2^(2^0), 4 = 2^(2^1), 16 = 2^(2^2), and so on; by starting with two and squaring over and over, we get terms like 2^(2^k) for which the corresponding values of T(n) are simply (k+1)a.
Given that n = 2^(2^k) and T(n) = (k+1)a, we can solve the first of these equations for k in terms of n and then substitute in the second. We get that log log n = k and so T(n) = (1 + log log n)a, which has the asymptotic bound you are after.
Technically, to complete this argument, we must note that T(n) is a monotonically non-decreasing function and so it is sufficient that we have shown the function is bounded in this way for this particular sequence of values of n. In general, a function might behave in such a way that the above method of analysis might be fooled into suggesting an inaccurate bound. For well-behaved functions this will not typically occur.