Former porn star Stormy Daniels sued President Donald Trump on Tuesday over a "hush agreement" she signed to conceal her alleged 2006 affair with him.

Daniels' suit contains a copy of the nondisclosure agreement, which refers to her and Trump under the aliases Peggy Peterson and David Dennison.

The NDA describes pictures and text messages related to their alleged affair, which it says Daniels was required to turn over to Trump or delete.

But Daniels' lawsuit argues that since Trump never signed the NDA, all its conditions are invalid.

A nondisclosure agreement that former adult-film star Stormy Daniels signed suggests that there may be photos or text messages that could corroborate her allegations that she once had an affair with President Donald Trump.

In a lawsuit Daniels filed Tuesday, her lawyers argue that a "hush agreement" meant to conceal the alleged affair was invalid because Trump never signed it.

The 28-page lawsuit includes a copy of the agreement Daniels said she signed, using the alias "Peggy Peterson" or "PP," and featuring a blank line where Trump, under the alias "David Dennison" or "DD," was meant to sign.

Twelve days before the 2016 presidential election, Michael Cohen, Trump's personal lawyer, paid Daniels $130,000, and prepared the NDA for her to sign so she wouldn't go public about her alleged 2006 affair with Trump. He was married to Melania Trump at the time, and she had just given birth to their son Barron.

But tucked into the NDA was a reference to "still images and/or text messages."

Here's the NDA's exact language, according to the lawsuit:

"2.1 Prior to entering into this Agreement, PP came into possession of certain 'Confidential Information' pertaining to DD, as more fully defined below, only some of which is in tangible form, which includes, but is not limited to information, certain still images and/or text messages which were authored by or relate to DD."

The NDA goes on to claim that Daniels even threatened to sell or publicly release the images or information.

It's unclear whether Daniels would still possess those texts or pictures — if they do indeed exist — because the NDA directed her to turn them over to DD and and delete any copies she may have had.

But if the material exists, if Daniels still has copies, and if she wins her suit to have the NDA declared null and void, it's possible she could release them.

The information could even emerge during the litigation process before a judge issues a ruling, business and employment attorney David Coale told Business Insider.

But it's not a sure thing that texts and photos exist, he added. Many nondisclosure agreements contain boilerplate language covering material that may or may not exist, and that could be the case in Daniels' suit.

"It might be a whole lot of nothing," Coale said. "Having said that, if she busts it, and [the NDA] doesn't apply, heck yeah, she can give it to a newspaper the next day."

Coale added that Daniels' lawsuit has some merit, though it's unclear whether it will go forward or not.

"I don't think they can just come in and laugh at it and say this ought to go to private arbitration — the court's going to have to do something," he said. "She has a serious argument that this is not a valid contract."

Read the full lawsuit and NDA below: