In « X accompagne Y », it’s implied that Y is taking the initiative and X is tagging along, but also supporting Y. For example, Y is going some place to do something and X has nothing better to do and/or wishes to keep Y company. In a very different context, if company Y retains the services of company X, it’s common to state in a mission statement that “X accompagne Y” in such and such task.

In your example, both terms of the opposition sound ok to me, but the second term sounds a bit more consistent, because presumably the gredins are leading in terms of being up to no good, and it is implied that “tu” is not at the same level, because “tu” may or may not yet “s’acoquiner”.

/The lowlifes (who are) tagging along with you/ (your sentence 1)

versus

/The lowlifes that you are tagging along with/ (your sentence 2) are both correct.

In 1) The lowlifes are following (tagging along with) the person and in 2) the person is following (tagging along with) the lowlifes.

The attitude re the person is expressed by the speaker who is saying two different things:

You are tagging along with them.
They are tagging along with you.

Obviously if “you” tag along with lowlifes, the implication is that you are in some way subservient to them. You are making them “the leaders”.

Whereas, if the lowlifes tag along with you, you are not in some way subservient to them. They are making you the “leader”.

There’s the idea of “superior”.