You mean like the "Russian collusion" fake charges?
Nobody is granting anything specifically new to the current president. It's already been in the Constitution (I presume, I am not a Constitutional scholar).
Now hang on a second. Were there actual "collusion" charges brought that had to defended in court? Surely they had a duty to investigate if they thought something was wrong. And they found a lot wrong with the entire stinking mess. Ultimately, there were no criminal charges brought against Trump himself, but that's not a reason not to investigate what did happen.
And, as I stated, my question about pardons was more general, not related to the current drama. If I remember right, Clinton made some pretty iffy use of it that raised a few eyebrows. Does it make sense that this power even exists?