This is a good point.
Regarding damages, the agreement could provide for liquidated damages, which is an amount that the parties agree to in the contract as representative of the amount of damages the non-breaching party would incur as a result of the breach. So, the liquidated damages could be $130,000 (or more), which Stormy would have to pay if she breached instead of the LLC having to calculate and show the actual damages it suffered. Liquidated damages provisions are regularly used and enforced. The primary reason why they are not enforced is if they are penalties rather than actual estimations of damages a party is likely to suffer as a result of a breach. So, you can't have an agreement with a liquidated damages provision for $100,000,000 for a deal that was for $130,000. The $100,000,000 is not a fair estimation of damages, but is rather used as a penalty (don't breach this or else!).
Theoretically, Trump could be a third party beneficiary of the agreement between the LLC and Stormy. So you could have an agreement between 2 parties where the benefit of the agreement flows to a 3rd party. (Quick example: We enter into a contract pursuant to which I will pay you $50 to mow my parent's yard. My parents are the third party beneficiaries of our agreement.) For a third party to enforce an agreement as a third party beneficiary, the third party has to show that they were the intended beneficiary of the agreement when it was written. So you'd usually see a provision that expressly identifies the third party as an intended beneficiary. I can't imagine how monumentally stupid it would be for the NDA with Stormy to expressly identify Trump as the third party beneficiary.