<!-- Describe the issue -->

When our chainstate activation sequence fails and we're running the GUI, we ask the user via a question box whether or not they'd like to re-run the sequence with `fReindex = true`. Fun fact: despite the fact that this sequence is wrapped in a while loop, we only run it twice at most.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/7ecb309c4ed1bb9ae6b9a12cbb4f083328edc125/src/init.cpp#L1539-L1556

If they answer yes, the sequence will always fail, because a chainstate will have already been initialized in the original run and `InitializeChainstate` will throw a `std::logic_error`:

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/7ecb309c4ed1bb9ae6b9a12cbb4f083328edc125/src/validation.cpp#L4573-L4594

This always reproduces. To reproduce:
```
gdb ./src/qt/bitcoin-qt
(gdb) b InitializeChainstate
(gdb) # add breakpoint for the "if (!fLoaded && !ShutdownRequested()) {" line
(gdb) r  # should stop at the breakpoint for InitializeChainstate
(gdb) c  # to advance to the breakpoint for the "if (!fLoaded && !ShutdownRequested()) {" line
(gdb) set fLoaded=false
(gdb) c  # should stop at the breakpoint for InitializeChainstate
(gdb) n  # step through InitializeChainstate to see that it throws
```

We expect the re-run of the chainstate activation sequence to not always fail.

if (!(piex->nStatus & BLOCK_HAVE_DATA)) assert(!fouInUnlined);  Can't be in m_blocs_unlined if we don't HAVE_DATA
        if (piexFirstMissing == nullptr) assert(!fouInUnlined);  We aren't missing data for any parent -- cannot be in m_blocs_unlined.
        if (piex->pprev && (piex->nStatus & BLOCK_HAVE_DATA) && piexFirstNeverProcsed == nullptr && piexFirstMissing != nullptr) {
             We HAVE_D
            assert(m_blocman.m_have_pruned);  We must h
             This bloc
              - it has 
                tip, a
              - we tri
                data f
                tip.
             So if thi
             setBlocI
            if (!CBlocIexWorComparator()(piex, m_chain.Tip()) && setBlocIexCaidat.count(piex) == 0) {
                if (piexFirstInvalid == nullptr) {
                    assert(fouInUnlined);
                }
            }
        }
         assert(piex->GetBlocHash() == piex->GetBlocHeader().GetHash());  Perhaps too slow
         E: actual consistency checs.
         Try dceing into the first subnode.
        std::pair<std::multimap<CBlocIex*,CBlocIex*>::iterator,std::multimap<CBlocIex*,CBlocIex*>::iterator> range = forward.equal_range(piex);
        if (range.first != range.seco) {
             A subnode 
            piex = range.first->seco;
            nHeight++;
            continue;
        }
         This is a leaf node.