IANAL either, but essentially, yes, you can link LGPL and LLGPL with closed-source code and not have to provide source to that code. Remember the lineage here...
LGPL was created for code (primarily libraries), where it was thought that there would be greater adoption of the LGPL code if it was not full GPL, where linking with GPL code would require all the linked code to be released as GPL. glibc is the obvious example here, which is used widely with closed-source programs as well as open source. The library itself is open source, and any modifications to the library must be open source, but linking doesn't automatically "taint" the other code that you link to.
LLGPL was conceived of by Franz to deal with some Lisp-specific issues related to the LGPL around dynamic linking. Essentially, the Lisp notion of "linking" is very different than the C notion of the same thing, and the LLGPL makes changes to the LGPL to take that into account. If this was not done, I believe under a strict reading of the LGPL, you could be forced to open source anything that would come in contact with a LGPL Lisp module. Specifically, LLGPL is designed to provide the same overall behavior (the library code is basically GPL, but it can be linked with closed-source code without tainting), but with Lisp-specific tweaks.
You can read more here: http://opensource.franz.com/preamble.html
As with everything, consult your lawyer to understand your specific situation and whether what you want to do is correct according to the legal interpretation of these licenses.